Blank Heros

[Mad Swede]

It starts with personalities and a question: Does this character need to be white? Male? Hetero? Cis? abled? Usually the answer is no, they don't, and since we write urban fantasy with the philosophy that it really does need to be urban (Chicago So White, anyone?) our cast diversifies pretty fast.

So fast that our first book, Faerie Rising, entirely lacks a male character who is straight, white, cis, and abled. Whoops.

At the start it's that simple. Once set on a course the homework begins, as we are writers and we do homework for a living. Sites like Writing With Color are invaluable to breaking stereotypes that we all carry with us into the world. We listen to them carefully, we fix our mistakes as we move forward, and we are open to doing better when we learn better. We also have a long-running series with about 500 named series characters planned, so there is a lot of room to grow. We learned early to not assume knowledge that isn't ours, to question, to listen, to learn, to be respectful and to strive for kindness, always, which is just good humaning, in my opinion.

It isn't easy to write beyond the common narrative. It's common because it's comfortable, but it really only benefits a small portion of readers. Everyone deserves to be the hero sometimes. In kids it's the silver bullet to self-esteem, and in adults it's validation of their existence and experiences. I know, as someone who is female, LGBTQ, fat, middle-aged, disabled, and autistic, it is terribly hard to find myself in the media I consume, so the three of us create heroes for ourselves and for the readers out there like us. And maybe someday we'll be a part of the common narrative, too.

I'm going to be a little rude here and ask a somewhat personal question. Do you feel the need to find yourself or someone like you in the media you consume? I'm a little puzzled, because despite my very severe dyslexia I've never missed a dyslectic character in any media I've consumed. It might be because I don't identify as anything other than myself - I don't feel a need to identify in terms of my disability or my career or anything else, I'm just me. Am I unusual or just privileged?

 

[Malakota]

After reading this, I feel I must ask, why are you writing to be vague, and not writing with character who match whatever your skin tone happens to be?

My sense of this is still something along the lines of, the author is trying to be cute, and have something without having to state it. I think I would sniff this out, and wonder why they were not just up front about it.

I am writing my characters this way so that they are judged by the content of their character. Their personalities are what shape them. Not the color of their skin. I think that framing that will help readers relate more and are able to see themselves in the actions and decisions of the characters. I also do this because of personal reasons and experiences that I have dealt with as a person of color.
May entire life and to this day, people mistake me for Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese, Hispanic, Native American, and Inuit. When I wear sunglasses, people think that I am Caucasian/Irish ,German, Italian. I figure if I have a vague physical description, then it will be fine if my characters do as well. I stated in an earlier response that my story follows a people that are relatively new to the world. So a primordial people would not have much in the way of diversity. It's not me trying to be cute. It's me writing to have characters that I relate to and hope others can as well.

 

[Mad Swede]

I feel the same.

I think this might depend on how you write. Writing first person means you never describe the point of view character, and a classic example is Dashiell Hammett's Continental Op. After four novels and thirty two short stories all we as readers know about his appearance is that he's middle aged, short and slightly fat. And we know that only because three other characters have commented on the Op's appearance. We never learn his name.

You can take the same approach if you write close third person, but it can be a little difficult to sustain. In my first novel the main character is only described about half way through, and then only because a woman gives him the once over whilst trying to decide if she's going to do a runner or not. My editor admitted that she'd been on the verge of asking me to describe the main character earlier in the novel until she saw when and why he got described. She also said that it worked in that case only because I'd written in close third person and then only because there were only four point of view characters.

 

[Malakota]

I think this might depend on how you write. Writing first person means you never describe the point of view character, and a classic example is Dashiell Hammett's Continental Op. After four novels and thirty two short stories all we as readers know about his appearance is that he's middle aged, short and slightly fat. And we know that only because three other characters have commented on the Op's appearance. We never learn his name.

You can take the same approach if you write close third person, but it can be a little difficult to sustain. In my first novel the main character is only described about half way through, and then only because a woman gives him the once over whilst trying to decide if she's going to do a runner or not. My editor admitted that she'd been on the verge of asking me to describe the main character earlier in the novel until she saw when and why he got described. She also said that it worked in that case only because I'd written in close third person and then only because there were only four point of view characters.

Thank you for the response, I think this was very helpful and constructive.

 

[pmmg]

I am writing my characters this way so that they are judged by the content of their character. Their personalities are what shape them. Not the color of their skin. I think that framing that will help readers relate more and are able to see themselves in the actions and decisions of the characters. I also do this because of personal reasons and experiences that I have dealt with as a person of color.
May entire life and to this day, people mistake me for Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese, Hispanic, Native American, and Inuit. When I wear sunglasses, people think that I am Caucasian/Irish ,German, Italian. I figure if I have a vague physical description, then it will be fine if my characters do as well. I stated in an earlier response that my story follows a people that are relatively new to the world. So a primordial people would not have much in the way of diversity. It's not me trying to be cute. It's me writing to have characters that I relate to and hope others can as well.

If the people are a primordial one, and don't have diversity, you have to write them as they are to stay true to the story. That is not something I am looking for myself in. Only, maybe, some type of universal truth of the whole of the species. Your concern seems to be representation of people of your ethnicity. So, my suspicion is there is a back door method here to get something on paper and sneak it in. Least based on the motivations you described. My feeling is, if that is detected, it will not have the effect you are wanting. It does not mater whether you wanted it or not, it just matters what the reader attaches to it.

But here in a forum post, we are just talking around it. Better to post it up and get real feedback. Better than that is not to poison the well, and have people who know nothing about what you are wanting read it and see if they make comments about it. The story has to speak from the page, not what we say about it afterwards.

Your question about will it help people to connect to them better... Well, maybe, and anything can happen. My suspicion is more likely than not, it will hurt or have no effect on relating to. My guess is, they will be more relatable the more they speak to things that are universally true, and not things that come from unfamiliar cultures or life experiences.

Your character will be judged by the content of their character regardless of their ethnicity. A dude with bad character will be thought a dude with bad character regardless. Ethnicity may add other baggage.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I'm going to be a little rude here and ask a somewhat personal question. Do you feel the need to find yourself or someone like you in the media you consume? I'm a little puzzled, because despite my very severe dyslexia I've never missed a dyslectic character in any media I've consumed. It might be because I don't identify as anything other than myself - I don't feel a need to identify in terms of my disability or my career or anything else, I'm just me. Am I unusual or just privileged?

What can I say? We like complicated. And yeah, honestly I would say from the perspective of having both my wife and my brother-in-law be severely dyslexic that if that was my only challenge, I'd be having a good day. My wife was able to work within it by the twist of fate of learning to read before she learned to write. My brother-in-law wasn't so lucky. Personally, I feel that outside of Middle Grade and YA there aren't enough depictions of communication disorders in general, and there should be. With autism, communication disorders are a common comorbidity. Mine is dyscalculia. Mathematically, I don't function above where the average 12 year-old stands in the American education system. Curiously, though, until you brought it up it wasn't something I realized was underrepresented. But it is, to the extent that I didn't even know it existed until grad school.

That's why representation matters.

 

[Queshire]

I'm going to be a little rude here and ask a somewhat personal question. Do you feel the need to find yourself or someone like you in the media you consume? I'm a little puzzled, because despite my very severe dyslexia I've never missed a dyslectic character in any media I've consumed. It might be because I don't identify as anything other than myself - I don't feel a need to identify in terms of my disability or my career or anything else, I'm just me. Am I unusual or just privileged?

I know this isn't addressed to me, but I'd say that describing it as a need is the wrong way to go about things. It's nice, ya know?

I'm sure that everyone has things they like which just don't show up that often in stories just due to the way stories are often constructed or things that make you go, "Oh hey, that's cool," that you just didn't think about until you saw it actually happen in a story. Maybe you're tired of heroes always using swords and it'd be neat to see one use a spear instead? But if people could think something like that is neat then couldn't they also think something along the lines that it'd be neat to have a chosen one protagonist who instead of fitting the whole heroic mold they're... I don't know. Use their chosen one status to be a charming rogue and scam people out of free stuff (but have a heart of gold in the end)? But if people could think something like that is neat then couldn't they also think that it'd be neat to be X? That it'd be neat to be X which is also something that the reader has personal first hand experience with?

It's all just the feeling of "Hey wouldn't it be cool if...?" Or "It's cool that..." that everyone has experience with, but spiraled out to things which the audience might have personal experience with.

It's a great experience to read a story just expecting, ya know, a pretty normal story about a protagonist dealing with becoming a werewolf and getting involved in werewolf society only to find this cool thing you weren't expecting at all. As readers and writers it's nice to think that you might be giving someone else the chance to experience something like that, or to think that you have the chance to craft the sort of experience you wish you could have had but didn't.

That is only one part however.

It's nice to learn about other people and how they live their lives. Not all stories are fiction. As much as we're writers I imagine most of us are readers as well. If you want to write a diverse world then you got to know enough about people to be able to write a diverse world. Now you got an excuse to listen to other people's stories.

It's a chance to be creative. If you don't have a default you go with for a character's gender, sexual / romantic attraction, whether or not they're disabled and so on then that becomes more aspects of the character that you can be creative with and you can use those aspects to play around with their backstory and their relations with other characters. It also offers you a chance to get creative with the world your characters inhabit. What if someone used the animating magic behind a golem or a flying sword and applied those to a prosthetic arm? What if there was magic originally meant to ensure that the King would always be able to have a heir regardless of personal fertility, but would conveniently allow homosexual couples to have a child? How would that affect society?

Personally it's just fun to avoid expectations and go "fuck the system." It's a wicked little rebellion.

 

[Malakota]

If the people are a primordial one, and don't have diversity, you have to write them as they are to stay true to the story. That is not something I am looking for myself in. Only, maybe, some type of universal truth of the whole of the species. Your concern seems to be representation of people of your ethnicity. So, my suspicion is there is a back door method here to get something on paper and sneak it in. Least based on the motivations you described. My feeling is, if that is detected, it will not have the effect you are wanting. It does not mater whether you wanted it or not, it just matters what the reader attaches to it.

Thank you for the comment, but I am not sure at what point you are trying to make. Your opinion seem to be all over the place and is hard to gain any constructive feedback in regards to the conversation at hand. I am simply trying to find out if other writers do this, how they go about it and if it has worked for them. Thank you again.

 

[Mad Swede]

In reply to both A. E. Lowan and Queshire (and I'm not sure how to phrase this) I wonder if the thing about identity is overdone?

Maybe this is down to my experiences on UN peacekeeping missions, where all too often identity was used by some leading people as a way of starting and then maintaining a conflict in order to serve their own interests. Or maybe it's becasue it wasn't a thing when I was a kid. I was just another son and grandson of farmers who had trouble reading and writing. Then later, as a soldier, I was just another person in green. None of it changes who I am. Maybe my grandmother had more influence on me than I like to admit.

Yes, I think it is important to include a diverse cast of characters if for no other reason than the fact that as an author I can do much more with them in terms of character and plot development. It makes for all sorts of possibilities, both rebellious and otherwise. I'm just not sure that putting an identity like that front and centre is the way to go for a character. I think I'd rather make those aspects a wider part of their character, as a way of conveying the message that whilst these things do make you a little different they don't change the fact that you're human (or whatever the character is) and that you are important as an individual. Possibly that too reflects my UN experiences. My editor has commented more than once that there is a message of hope which runs through all my novels and short stories, and maybe my approach is another part of that message.

But then again, maybe I've missed the point?

 

[A. E. Lowan]

In reply to both A. E. Lowan and Queshire (and I'm not sure how to phrase this) I wonder if the thing about identity is overdone?

Maybe this is down to my experiences on UN peacekeeping missions, where all too often identity was used by some leading people as a way of starting and then maintaining a conflict in order to serve their own interests. Or maybe it's becasue it wasn't a thing when I was a kid. I was just another son and grandson of farmers who had trouble reading and writing. Then later, as a soldier, I was just another person in green. None of it changes who I am. Maybe my grandmother had more influence on me than I like to admit.

Yes, I think it is important to include a diverse cast of characters if for no other reason than the fact that as an author I can do much more with them in terms of character and plot development. It makes for all sorts of possibilities, both rebellious and otherwise. I'm just not sure that putting an identity like that front and centre is the way to go for a character. I think I'd rather make those aspects a wider part of their character, as a way of conveying the message that whilst these things do make you a little different they don't change the fact that you're human (or whatever the character is) and that you are important as an individual. Possibly that too reflects my UN experiences. My editor has commented more than once that there is a message of hope which runs through all my novels and short stories, and maybe my approach is another part of that message.

But then again, maybe I've missed the point?

I would say that 'missed' maybe a bit strong. Every time we touch on this subject you edge just a little more onto the path that will bring you to the Dark Side. Enjoy the cookies. We have all sorts.

As a lot of people know, my wife and I have been writing together since we were fifteen. Our writing partner joined us much later, about ten years ago. Representation is very important to us as authors and as people trying to human as best we can. Along the way we've had to do a lot of unpacking. Unpacking privilege, because the three of us are white, and unpacking the best, most respectful and most accurate ways to represent characters whose life experiences are very different from ours. Being Fantasy writers, this is basically a good Tuesday. It's been a learning process, and a lesson in humility. It isn't easy to admit that you were raised with stereotypes and misconceptions standing in for truth. It isn't easy to admit that the world is an incredibly complicated place and that no one is a monolith for their race, their religion, their culture, their sexuality/gender expression/sex/or gender identity. Humans like simple things. We like binaries. The only thing is, nature doesn't, and that's the jumbled, messy world we live in. We humans enforce this binary idea on everything, to the extent that we teach our children that only some people get to have stories told about them, and the rest of us can just sit in the back and be grateful we get to participate at all.

There are important questions to ask when we engage with or create media.


And that, in the simplest terms, is why making conscious choices to practice radical empathy and include portrayals of characters who aren't like us. It's hard. It's scary. It's stressful, more stressful than just whipping up the familiar and showing it around knowing it's familiar to everyone who reads it, too. But people like us here in this forum, we choose bravery. We choose empathy. We choose compassion. We don't lock out most of the human race just to reach for easy. We choose.

So, no, I don't think you've missed the point. I think you're just about there. Keep at it. Readers are depending on you.

 

[Queshire]

In reply to both A. E. Lowan and Queshire (and I'm not sure how to phrase this) I wonder if the thing about identity is overdone?

Maybe this is down to my experiences on UN peacekeeping missions, where all too often identity was used by some leading people as a way of starting and then maintaining a conflict in order to serve their own interests. Or maybe it's becasue it wasn't a thing when I was a kid. I was just another son and grandson of farmers who had trouble reading and writing. Then later, as a soldier, I was just another person in green. None of it changes who I am. Maybe my grandmother had more influence on me than I like to admit.

Yes, I think it is important to include a diverse cast of characters if for no other reason than the fact that as an author I can do much more with them in terms of character and plot development. It makes for all sorts of possibilities, both rebellious and otherwise. I'm just not sure that putting an identity like that front and centre is the way to go for a character. I think I'd rather make those aspects a wider part of their character, as a way of conveying the message that whilst these things do make you a little different they don't change the fact that you're human (or whatever the character is) and that you are important as an individual. Possibly that too reflects my UN experiences. My editor has commented more than once that there is a message of hope which runs through all my novels and short stories, and maybe my approach is another part of that message.

But then again, maybe I've missed the point?

For the most part I don't think it's something that's front and center when it comes to creating characters. It's just something that gets talked about a lot. If you're a cynic then it's a neatly packaged sound bite for publishers or critics. It's easy to say that whatever series has more gay people in it than a pride parade regardless of whether that's something you mean as a good thing or a bad thing. If you're more hopeful then they're aspects of characters that are just easy for authors to overlook when making a character and if you're a writer giving advice to writers or readers then yeah, you're probably going to advise them to think about those things which are easy to overlook.

 

[pmmg]

I think the above is well presented, but for me, this is just one way among many. I don't mind including characters of diverse backgrounds when it makes sense to include them. But I think it is a poor service to include things that don't belong. Many of the lands and time periods I write in would not have such diversity, and it would seem out of place to include it. I just try to write what is true, and its not always sensitive to others according to today's standards.

I must object that by not including these, I have not engaged in empathy or compassion. There are many ways to have such things. And many filters by which those things can be assigned. While there are many who share these sentiments, there are many schools of thought on what we as writers should most be doing. Never in my life have I held a sentiment like 'feel lucky you get to participate at all', and I don't know any who have.

Who writes, who reads, and who is missing, would seem to me to be something I should ask as a reader, and when considering the whole of the written word, and its impact on shaping the world around us, but its not something I need to ask for every individual story. For that, I just ask what is true.

 

[Queshire]

For that, I just ask what is true.

"What is true." An excellent way to phrase things. It is a virtue amongst writers.

Different people simply come up with different answers to what is true. For me considering those sorts of aspects when it comes to creating a character is an excercise in writing what is true.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

"What is true."

As a medievalist and a student of language and literature, I'm pretty familiar with this idea, and I understand where it comes from. It's easy to imagine that a world lit only by fire would have pretty hard and fast delineations between disparate populations and ethnic groups. To each their own and all that.

That's not what actually happened.

We get the concept from much more recent scholars who didn't like what the things they were finding said about their perceptions of their world and the worlds that had gone before, so they edited it until it matched what they wanted to see. Entire populations were erased. Women leaders of every stripe, 'foreign' influences on learning, politics, religion, and philosophy were literally cut page by page from the record. So much is missing that only in recent years have we begun to understand the extent of the damage done.

One thing remains true, as it has been since we stood up and peered over the grasslands and feared the darkness: populations that trade, that migrate, that emerge from their caves at all, will mingle. The Vikings traveled the world. We are finding now that they weren't the people we thought they were. This pattern repeats over and over, and is reflected in our very DNA. What is true? It is more complicated than we ever thought possible, and populations were far more diverse and culturally rich than we give them credit for. The shadows and ghosts of that truth are still there in the record, in the blank spaces left behind. It's there in the question, "Who's missing from the stories?"

 

[Queshire]

Nobunaga had a black samurai in his employ and there was a nonbinary preacher right around when the US constitution was becoming a thing.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Nobunaga had a black samurai in his employ and there was a nonbinary preacher right around when the US constitution was becoming a thing.

Yup, you aren't wrong.

 

[The Dark One]

To my mind, differentiating the characters is most important via their words and actions.

Of course they need a name and maybe a couple of characteristic details, but it doesn't matter how many observable characteristics you give them if their speech just blends into the general flow.

When I'm writing well I don't even need to add dialogue tags because it's obvious who is saying what.

 

[Queshire]

To my mind, differentiating the characters is most important via their words and actions.

Of course they need a name and maybe a couple of characteristic details, but it doesn't matter how many observable characteristics you give them if their speech just blends into the general flow.

When I'm writing well I don't even need to add dialogue tags because it's obvious who is saying what.

Hm. Sounds like what the OP wanted to achieve.

 

[Mad Swede]

For the most part I don't think it's something that's front and center when it comes to creating characters. It's just something that gets talked about a lot. If you're a cynic then it's a neatly packaged sound bite for publishers or critics. It's easy to say that whatever series has more gay people in it than a pride parade regardless of whether that's something you mean as a good thing or a bad thing. If you're more hopeful then they're aspects of characters that are just easy for authors to overlook when making a character and if you're a writer giving advice to writers or readers then yeah, you're probably going to advise them to think about those things which are easy to overlook.

I agree with you when it comes to creating characters.

I think what I was trying to get at (badly, I admit) is something that has struck myself, my editor and my Swedish publisher in our discussions with English language publishers in the US and UK. We've got the impression, perhaps wrongly or unfairly, that there is a drive to publish books about diverse characters where those characters' identities are seen as being important, along the lines of "we want books about <identity> characters". I'm told this is true of many agents in the US as well. As I say, this impression may be unfair and inaccurate. The thing is, if that impression is even partly correct then perhaps authors might focus more on putting this identity front and centre rather than writing books with well rounded characters and a well developed plot. For me, that means we risk loosing what A. E. Lowan refers to as that radical empathy and compassion that comes with good portrayals of characters who aren't like us. It's not that we can't produce well rounded characters where their identity is important, it's that we risk losing focus on what makes a complex character with whom we can identify. I suppose I'm worried (afraid?) that we will once again over-simplify what is a very complex subject.

 

[Queshire]

Ok, but that's on the publishers.